Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charlotte County weighs creating local building-code appeals board, civil penalties and MOU options
Summary
County staff briefed supervisors on state-code enforcement requirements and two options for appeals: form a local appeals board (five-plus members including an architect/PE) or MOU with a neighboring county; staff also presented a draft civil-penalties ordinance and estimated per‑meeting compensation for board members.
County staff told the Board of Supervisors that the building official must enforce the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC) and that the board does not have discretion to selectively enforce code provisions. Staff outlined two primary options for handling appeals and code-administration matters: reestablish a local board (minimum five members meeting prescribed qualifications including contractors and at least one professional engineer or architect) or enter an interlocal memorandum of understanding with a neighboring county that already has a board to hear appeals.
Staff said they have identified five local candidates who meet most criteria but have not yet located a licensed professional engineer or architect willing to serve. The board discussed feasibility concerns: finding qualified members from every district may be difficult and the board-wide composition requirement could limit candidate availability. Compensation was discussed: the county typically pays $30 per meeting per member (for example, $210 per meeting for seven members), and members would be called only when an appeal arises.
Staff also said Russell has drafted an ordinance to permit civil penalties for code violations and repeated violations, with fines that can be up to $2,500. Board members debated whether civil penalties or court actions were preferable; some supervisors voiced hesitancy about imposing civil penalties and noted past practice had not required a local appeals board for many years. The building official and staff agreed to compile a list of potential local appointees, provide the building-code criteria, and return with a recommendation; if the county cannot locate a qualified engineer/architect, staff will explore an MOU with another county.
No formal board action to adopt penalties or create the board occurred at this meeting; the board instructed staff (Mr. Witt) to gather candidate names and bring proposed language and membership lists back for consideration.
